Lets see if we can keep this thread a little more civil.

I found this interview very interesting.  A lot of soft balls thrown at Trump, he explained his back pedalling on his more extreme issues as a lot of his claims as opening bids for negotiation purposes.  Which .. whatever .. I still think that those are insincere claims he used to get elected.

He does now come across way more presidential then he did prior to the election.  A lot of his noise, yelling, and rhetoric has been scaled back.

Do respect this one though:

Quote

 

Lesley Stahl: Are you gonna take the salary, the president’s salary?

Donald Trump: Well, I’ve never commented on this, but the answer is no. I think I have to by law take $1, so I’ll take $1 a year. But it’s a -- I don’t even know what it is.

Donald Trump: Do you know what the salary is?

Lesley Stahl: $400,000 you’re giving up.

Donald Trump: No, I’m not gonna take the salary. I’m not taking it.

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/60-minutes-donald-trump-family-melania-ivanka-lesley-stahl/

Quote

I think it would surprise many here to learn that Justin Trudeau is working actively to over-turn the Genetic Protection law here in Canada, that was brought in by Harper and the Conservatives

 

Doesn't surprise me in the least.

Turns out, there's very little policy difference between Justin Trudeau, and S. Harper.

But I wasn't aware of this that you pointed out.

He could well be a one term P.M.

Edited March 13, 20178 yr by Mark F

13 minutes ago, Mark F said:

Doesn't surprise me in the least.

Turns out, there's very little policy difference between Justin Trudeau, and S. Harper.

 

yet he's working to over-turn legislation that Harper's government brought in, so your statement above would not appear to be accurate.

Edited March 13, 20178 yr by kelownabomberfan

Not sure I understand then.

I thought the genetic legislation was brought in by a liberal senator.

article didn't see who introducted it to parliament. If it was Harper then he's superior to Trudeau on this.

In general my statement above is accurate. re Oil, resources extraction, pipelines, international trade agreements, there's no difference between the two.

https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2017/03/07/parliament-to-debate-vote-on-genetic-testing-bill-after-months-of-lobbying-from-both-sides.html  It is a rarity that a private member's (Liberal Senator) bill becomes law, so Harper can't really take credit for this.  Liberal MP Rob Oliphant is shepherding it through right now.  It should be noted that BC, Quebec and Manitoba (lead by a Premier who amassed his fortune in the insurance industry) are the Provinces questioning the Constitutionality of this measure.  This one is pretty muddy.  There is either a real Constitutional issue here or the insurance industry got to Trudeau - or a bit of both.

 

13 minutes ago, Mark F said:

Not sure I understand then.

I thought the genetic legislation was brought in by a liberal senator.

article didn't see who introducted it to parliament. If it was Harper then he's superior to Trudeau on this.

In general my statement above is accurate. re Oil, resources extraction, pipelines, international trade agreements, there's no difference between the two.

Yes it is muddy.  It was introduced by a Liberal senator in 2013, and took until March 9th, 2017 to get to a vote.  It was supported by all of the Conservatives and the NDP, and only passed because 100 Liberals voted for it too, as Trudeau allowed them to free vote on the issue.  But it appears that Trudeau and his cabinet are opposed to this bill, for reasons unknown.

15 minutes ago, Mark F said:

Not sure I understand then.

I thought the genetic legislation was brought in by a liberal senator.

article didn't see who introducted it to parliament. If it was Harper then he's superior to Trudeau on this.

In general my statement above is accurate. re Oil, resources extraction, pipelines, international trade agreements, there's no difference between the two.

Big difference for me is the carbon tax.  I just hate that tax with a giant passion.  Mostly because we already are getting totally shafted by it here in BC already.  Guess why we are the only province that is running surpluses.  And it's not because of spending cut-backs.

The Trump insanity continues.  They have today to provide Congress with evidence to support Trump's claim Obama ordered his phones tapped.  Thus far, no evidence.  Instead, Conway goes on TV and doubles down claiming wider spread surveillance including with the use of microwaves and televisions and when asked for evidence said thats not her job.

Amazing.

 

ohhhh ok. Isn't it illegal to make unsubstantiated accusations against people?

millions of "smart " home appliance that ar connected to the internet can be and have been used to mount denial of service attacks.

This has got nothing at all to do with wiretapping Trump.

All of the previous Presidents and their representatives were  miles ahead of this group in the department: "Bullshitting and lying with sincerity"

These Trump people are surprisingly bad in this area.

 

Well I guess the point isnt to create a believable alternative.  Its just to make enough noise to drown out the relevant criticism of Trump.  Although if I was him Im not sure I'd want to create a scenario where "Congressional Investigation" is so easily connected to me. 

I'd like to take these tweets that have a pic of Spicer commenting and replace the pic with the Iraqi information officer.  I bet it would be just as relevant and entirely more amusing.

12 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

ohhhh ok. Isn't it illegal to make unsubstantiated accusations against people?

Was it illegal when the New York Times reported on January 20th that Trump was being wire-tapped?

http://nypost.com/2017/03/08/did-the-new-york-times-already-tell-us-trump-was-wiretapped/

6 minutes ago, kelownabomberfan said:

Was it illegal when the New York Times reported on January 20th that Trump was being wire-tapped?

http://nypost.com/2017/03/08/did-the-new-york-times-already-tell-us-trump-was-wiretapped/

Problem is that they didn't report that at all.  They only reported that Trump people were recorded but on who's phone?  If it was a Russian line being tapped and they happened to get recordings of Trump people, that's a far cry from Trump himself being the subject of wire-tapping.

37 minutes ago, bigg jay said:

Problem is that they didn't report that at all.  They only reported that Trump people were recorded but on who's phone?  If it was a Russian line being tapped and they happened to get recordings of Trump people, that's a far cry from Trump himself being the subject of wire-tapping.

Whoops! lol

 

Also, KBF why is your response always to push some of the same fake news stuff that Trump does or to point out bad acts by others as if that makes it ok?  You seem very much a supporter of Trump's, is that the case?

Just watched the latest installment of SSL.   (Sean Spicer Live)

 

A week earlier, Spicer said Trump's tweet "speaks for itself" and declined to provide any further explanation.

 

Now Sean Spicer said Trump wasn't referring to wiretapping when he tweeted about wiretapping.  "The President used the word wiretaps in quotes to mean, broadly, surveillance and other activities."  Spicer added that Trump was not accusing Obama of personal involvement

 

Re-read the tweets and see how this jibes.....

 

Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my "wires tapped" in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 4, 2017

Is it legal for a sitting President to be "wire tapping" a race for president prior to an election? Turned down by court earlier. A NEW LOW!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 4, 2017

How low has President Obama gone to tap my phones during the very sacred election process. This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 4, 2017

 

Any impartial observer could easily conclude that the Donald directly accused a past President of a felony, and repeated it multiple times - without a shred of evidence.   FBI, Justice Department and even the Republicans on the NSC, found zippo.   Today, still nothing - except for the tough guy straight shooter Trump, simply trying to spin it and weasel his way out. 

 

An apology would require just a touch of decency or class......but we are dealing with an empty vessel here.   Tough for Angry Spice.... as he has to keep the massive pile of BS, stacked to the ceiling......from falling over.

 

This administration is turning serial lying and distortion of facts (alternative) into an art form.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 13, 20178 yr by do or die

I kind of feel bad for Spicer in a way.  The lunatic that harassed with at an Apple Store would make anyone jumpy.  But then again, he doesnt have to take the job.  Other people, in the past, have quit rather then kiss the ring of a President. 

The walk-back comes across like Spicer admitting Trump doesnt know what "wire tapping" means.  The President is too stupid to know that accusing Obama of wire tapping his phones means that he thinks Obama wire tapped his phones.  Okay.

Listing to Spicer, and Conway earlier in the day  (check out her babble)..... is like being trapped in a alternative universe.

6 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

I kind of feel bad for Spicer in a way.  The lunatic that harassed with at an Apple Store would make anyone jumpy.  But then again, he doesnt have to take the job.  Other people, in the past, have quit rather then kiss the ring of a President. 

The walk-back comes across like Spicer admitting Trump doesnt know what "wire tapping" means.  The President is too stupid to know that accusing Obama of wire tapping his phones means that he thinks Obama wire tapped his phones.  Okay.

Yup you have to play stupid, in order to peddle this stuff....

34 minutes ago, do or die said:

Listing to Spicer, and Conway earlier in the day  (check out her babble)..... is like being trapped in a alternative universe.

Conway is really good at her job.  Spicer not so much.  I like Conway in many ways but sure its the same thing.  She's a hired mercenary which many in politics are but at some point you have to question someones sense of decency.

I saw some whining on social media because Conway is being criticized. The backlash is how dare the left attack a successful, beautiful mother.  I didn't realize being a woman, being successful, being beautiful and being a mother meant you were allowed to spew all sorts of crazy without being criticized.  Thats sort of antifeminism really.  Like she's an example to little girls for being a strong successful career woman and mother but be gentle on her cause she's just a girl.

3 hours ago, bigg jay said:

Problem is that they didn't report that at all.  They only reported that Trump people were recorded but on who's phone?  If it was a Russian line being tapped and they happened to get recordings of Trump people, that's a far cry from Trump himself being the subject of wire-tapping.

Well that's the question now isn't it?  I don't think that you can just dismiss this report by the New York Times that easily, though I know a lot of people wish that it could be that easy.  My issue with the NYT is that they seem to be jumping on whatever story they can that they can spin to the negative, much like CNN and MSNBC, and in this case, in my view, they got burned.  If they knew Trump was being wire-tapped, and reported it, then who was doing it?  They must have some proof.  I don't think it was Obama, and I think it was really stupid of Trump to say that it was, especially on Twitter.  But that being said, NYT should have been more careful in this instance in my opinion, and/or should tell us just who was wire-tapping Trump and his team, and why they were doing it.

As the NY Post article states:
 

Quote

 

The reason the Times has a dilemma is that, on Jan. 20, the paper ran a front-page story with the headline “Wiretapped Data Used in Inquiry of Trump Aides.”

There were four bylines on that story, which read, “American law enforcement and intelligence agencies are examining intercepted communications and financial transactions as part of a broad investigation into possible links between Russian officials and associates of President-elect Donald J. Trump, including former campaign chairman Paul Manafort, current and former senior American officials said.”

So, would the Times like to retract the Jan. 20 front-page article? Or would it like to amend its piece about Trump’s allegations that his campaign was wiretapped by adding, “Trump may not have proof, but the Times confirmed back in January that wiretapping did occur.”?

It’s unclear whether the wire­tapping to which the Times is referring was of Trump’s people or whether Trump’s people were picked up on electronic surveillance — which is the proper term — of Russian phones.

 

 

Either way, the Times knows — and I’m told its reporters saw transcripts of the conversations — that Trump’s people had been recorded on bugs.

So there are two choices: Either correct the Jan. 20 story or admit that Trump may be at least a little right.

 

 

Edited March 13, 20178 yr by kelownabomberfan

2 hours ago, do or die said:

 

This administration is turning serial lying and distortion of facts (alternative) into an art form.

 

LOL - then you must be having amnesia and totally forget the Bill Clinton administration...

1 hour ago, The Unknown Poster said:

Conway is really good at her job.  Spicer not so much.  I like Conway in many ways but sure its the same thing.  She's a hired mercenary which many in politics are but at some point you have to question someones sense of decency.

I saw some whining on social media because Conway is being criticized. The backlash is how dare the left attack a successful, beautiful mother.  I didn't realize being a woman, being successful, being beautiful and being a mother meant you were allowed to spew all sorts of crazy without being criticized.  Thats sort of antifeminism really.  Like she's an example to little girls for being a strong successful career woman and mother but be gentle on her cause she's just a girl.

Actually I don't think that's the argument.

The argument I see put forward by some is if a man conducts himself like her, he's seen as brilliant, assertive and is doing what he has to do but simply because she is a woman she as seen as a ***** with no class and sense of decency.  

However in this particular case for some like myself, what we struggle with has nothing to do with gender. 

Today's big Stateside news is that the CBO* says that the pending American Health Care Act, aka "Trumpcare", aka "repeal and replace" will result in 24 million fewer insured Americans in the next decade.  It will cut about a trillion dollars in spending over that period and balance that with ~$800B tax cut, the vast majority of which will benefit American with family incomes over $200K -- the top two or three percent.

* Congressional Budget Office, a bunch of accountants and economists who determine the deficit and economic impacts of bills that Congress is pondering. Congressional rules require that the CBO score the final impact of bills under serious consideration by the House.  They are officially non-partisan, and the current director of the office was appointed by the republican congress of 2015.

Edited March 13, 20178 yr by johnzo

5 minutes ago, kelownabomberfan said:

LOL - then you must be having amnesia and totally forget the Bill Clinton administration...

You know I love you because you're a Bomber and Jet fan, but your constant two wrongs make a right, make it less serious, make it whatever doesn't add up. To me it's lazy thinking, path of least resistance. For some of us, to use politics as an example because that's what we happen to be discussing here, some of us acknowledge the hypocrisies. Sometimes it's legitimate to state previous behaviours were just as bad. In a way though, ironically it supports the original premise being true. And, to use your most recent example, if Clinton's administration was just as bad as you imply, we can't go back in time. We can't fix that. As a collective we can though deal with the here and now and challenge serial lying and significant distortion of facts when it's coming from people who have significant decision making authorities.  I refuse to take the 'everyone does it, everyone has done it' approach. 

12 hours ago, kelownabomberfan said:

I think it would surprise many here to learn that Justin Trudeau is working actively to over-turn the Genetic Protection law here in Canada, that was brought in by a Liberal senator, and supported by Harper and the Conservatives.  So essentially, from what I am reading, Justin Trudeau is on the same side as the Republicans in the USA.  Let that blow your minds for awhile.

 http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/03/canada-s-new-genetic-privacy-law-causing-huge-headaches-justin-trudeau

It amazes me that it got to a free vote.  I am no Canadian political scientist, but from what I remember you wouldn't see the caucus defying the leadership like that in a Harper or Chretien government.

Yeah, this looks pretty evil. Good on the MPs who voted for it.

Edited March 14, 20178 yr by johnzo